Beginner Macro DeviceProbably because its Balanced mode is now 50% render, whereas FSR renders things at 59 percent at the Balanced mode.

That's why I compared via setting the scaling ratio manually. Still, too odd even if my assumption on 50/59 is true.

Reinstalled the game from zero. Dropped the xess 1.31 dll. Exact same results at Balanced settings. Apparently 50/59 does make that difference. When I compare FSR Performance vs XeSS Balanced FSR takes the lead but with a smaller difference (FSR2 and FSR3 68FPS, XeSS 64FPS (same scene, RT Ultra)). They should be both at 50% at this setting right?

adilazimdegilxThey should be both at 50% at this setting right?

Yup. I don't have a slightest what's going off on your end. Try inputting the 50/50 DSR for both FSR and XeSS and see if it's still 68/64 for them.


Disregard this. It's clearly 50/59 now.

Vayra86Oh yeah, sure, an Nvidia game that also appears on every console where it uses AMD technology. Come on dude. What bags of money, they're bloody releasing the vast majority of sales on AMD hardware.

Current consoles are RDNA2 and AMD is not exactly the company that creates a dozen proprietary techs that work only on it's hardware. Developers can build a game around console hardware and then take that version and implement/change it to be better optimized for Nvidia hardware before releasing it for PCs. Who says that the console version of a game wouldn't run better on an RDNA2 GPU than the final PC version? Especially when that PC version has seen considerable changes to work better under Nvidia hardware?
The fact that many AMD techs that where developed after the release of current consoles are not supported, or they are implemented with big delays and/or implemented badly does show something. Maybe you have a theory of why FSR 3.x was 1 year late, why based mods are working better than this official support (based on what many are saying online) and of course why 3.1 wasn't chosen.

john_Maybe you have a theory of why FSR 3.x was 1 year late, why based mods are working better than this official support (based on what many are saying online) and of course why 3.1 wasn't chosen.

This has nothing to do with consoles in case of Cyberpunk, it's almost blatantly PC exclusive at this point. Even the PS5 version is whackamole, last gen consoles prove basically unplayable. The biggest deal here is PC gamers and those mostly consist of NVIDIA owners. Which means CDPR dgaf about AMD features.

Do I need to also remind you what RT and PT technologies are used in the game? Do I need to say AMD equipment just isn't it? CP2077 runs on AMD GPUs on a collateral damage basis, it's almost not intended. With such a downfall of Radeon, I see that happening in gaming in general in spite of current gen consoles using Radeon graphics. Forced RT in gaming will just outright kill AMD in a matter of years.

Beginner Macro DeviceThis has nothing to do with consoles in case of Cyberpunk, it's almost blatantly PC exclusive at this point. Even the PS5 version is whackamole, last gen consoles prove basically unplayable. The biggest deal here is PC gamers and those mostly consist of NVIDIA owners. Which means CDPR dgaf about AMD features.

Do I need to also remind you what RT and PT technologies are used in the game? Do I need to say AMD equipment just isn't it? CP2077 runs on AMD GPUs on a collateral damage basis, it's almost not intended. With such a downfall of Radeon, I see that happening in gaming in general in spite of current gen consoles using Radeon graphics. Forced RT in gaming will just outright kill AMD in a matter of years.

I believe we are looking this from the same perspective. You don't have to remind me what I am already saying.

z1n0xI wont quote anybody and just post it as a general comment.

Stop making excuses on behalf of AMD. They are no longer that struggling company that is on brink of bankruptcy, trying to survive against two giants. Nowadays they are healthy and profitable business and must do a better job. Their fans (i used to be one as well, until they spent billions on share buybacks instead of improving the company and its technologies) should demand and expect better job from them.

When will they abandon the low cost, low efforts approach of just releasing something as open source and leaving it to the developers to implement it well, which almost never happens. Instead of using Nvidia/Intel approach of utilizing the Nvidia's Streamline SDK and continuously refine the upscaling algorithms and models and updating the binaries. When are they going to release a machine learning enhanced version of FSR? FSR continue to shimmer and ghosts and have all kinds of other image quality shortcomings.

AMD wants to win back market share. That wont happen If they continue with the low cost, low efforts approach. Nvidia's market share gains have shown that people are willing to spend more for extra features and good experience. Like i said in another post, competing solely on raster/price is no longer enough.

Look at the state in which Zen5 was released. The infamous "Finewine" technology, i.e. beta drivers.

AMD MUST DO A BETTER JOB! Especially on the software side.

I disagree. If AMD went closed-source, closed ecosystem like Nvidia, then nobody would code for their software, as 10% of the user base is not worth the effort. I personally don't want more competition on the closed software front, either. What I want is open standards that run on everything. For that matter, I find the Nvidia approach anti-competitive and anti-consumer, and won't buy another green card as long as they charge extra for such practices.

Besides, like it's been said, FSR is open-source, so adding it to a game is the developer's job. Cyberpunk isn't exactly new at this point, so the fact that the devs took the effort to update the FSR version in it is a plus. We should be happy that they did instead of slagging AMD off for something that they had nothing to do with.

So, for some reason all this update has done for me has reduced my fps.
My hardware hasn't changed and still have a RTX 4090, 64gb ddr5 6600mhz cl30, 14 gen Intel all P 5.8 etc

Previously, I would have it all maxed with 4k path tracing etc. Disable blur and depth of field..have dlss on quality with frame gen and the benchmark would always be a smidge over 120.
Now. Same settings and avg is 75 with max of 84 and low of 69. Thats just with dlss auto not quality.

Updated NVIDIA drivers.. maybe I need to put the new dlss FG, dlss ray recon and dlss (there are 3 files from memory). Plonk them in manually and replace.

I only had 3.5.1 for two of the DLL files and DLSS 3.7.10 DLL being the only one with the latest.

Now running the benchmark at 4k maxed out including path tracing and DLSS in quality. With Ray Reconstruction and Frame Generation gave me 141 frames per second average. Before was just under 80.

On a side note, my thick 4 slot Asus RTX 4090 OC ed. Wanted to give me more frames and I could sense it become fearful of the 5000 series.

Even thhough, itshe requires no increase or change to voltage or the power limit. It has yet to go under 2910mhz core. Only when I have not increased the core at all. Total default still hits 2880mhz and not the reported 2565mhz boost.

During the Cyberpunk benchmarks and when playing it. Went as low as 3000mhz but mostly stuck at 3015-3030mhz. With my custom fan curve always at 30% and slowly ramps up. Usually only 70% if It was to go over 75c but accidentally had it at 76% from 60c onwards.
www.techpowerup.com/download/drivers/

It's a lovely quiet card, in which we are developing a silicon and carbon bases lifeform kindship. Even better than the good old Gainward Golden Sample cards of the past.

I'm Looking forward to contesting the 5090s but no doubt my jealous card will remind me about leather jacket mens nonsensical graphs and the use of low grade comparison cards. Yet, I'm not sure why most 4090s are only advertised with having a boost clock 20% less than actual. Maybe it's some wacko tax thing..

Not unlike my old RTX 2080 Ti that was nerfed with a power limit of 280 watts. After flashing it with the 373w bios it became a 3080 10gb eater.

- end tangent. Actually no.. my phone screen has me lost in my tl;dr

Get your 3x DLSS files here: www.techpowerup.com/download/drivers/

Anyway. If anyone else loses noticeable performance, simply reinstall a clean graphic card driver package and replace the existing 3 DLSS FG, DLSS Ray Reconstruction and general DLSS 3.7.10 DLL files.

Turn off motion blur and depth of field if you prefer more fps for a couple graphical features that don't hurt the immersion factor of highest detail your PC can handle


DLSS
DLSS Ray Reconstruction and;
DLSS Frame Generation

*Update* fixed. Indeed overwriting the 3.5.1 DLSS files with the new 3.7.10 fixed it. Doubled the frames per second, improved the look and overall performance is totally smooth.

Weird why Steam doesn't automatically update these files for games that use them.

Heck should be in system32 and as part of windows updates. They aren't game specific but each game uses what ever they have in its directory.

john_Current consoles are RDNA2 and AMD is not exactly the company that creates a dozen proprietary techs that work only on it's hardware. Developers can build a game around console hardware and then take that version and implement/change it to be better optimized for Nvidia hardware before releasing it for PCs. Who says that the console version of a game wouldn't run better on an RDNA2 GPU than the final PC version? Especially when that PC version has seen considerable changes to work better under Nvidia hardware?
The fact that many AMD techs that where developed after the release of current consoles are not supported, or they are implemented with big delays and/or implemented badly does show something. Maybe you have a theory of why FSR 3.x was 1 year late, why based mods are working better than this official support (based on what many are saying online) and of course why 3.1 wasn't chosen.

That theory is quite simple. Lacking dedication and workforce. Its the story of Radeon's life. The lack of consistency results in a responsive strategy for AMD GPUs. This is not a technical issue. Its a management issue. AMD shows us time and time again it CAN make and release great stuff.

But its a bit like the 16 year old child. You know that they know how to do things proper. But it might just decide to stay in bed until 12AM today, because reasons. Or, it wakes up in a supposed new reality that requires radical change. Part of that is a healthy development; gotta fail to learn, right? But another part of it is just their struggle, because they are not leading in the market; but more importantly they also dont invest in a feature(set) heavily enough to become a leading force in whatever niche. Big daddy Nvidia decides where the market moves, AMD resists, but places nothing up against it, so then theyre forced to follow. So its not purely negative bitching on AMD from my end, but the results speak for itself. AMD needs to get much more consistent on the GPU front to make its products shine and sell.

There's also an exception to that status quo: FreeSync. AMD pushed that successfully I think, and the result was basically the demise of Gsync AND a green cash cow. But... did AMD benefit much? Doubtful! Again, management/strategy... what is it? The tech wasnt the problem...

john_Current consoles are RDNA2 and AMD is not exactly the company that creates a dozen proprietary techs that work only on it's hardware. Developers can build a game around console hardware and then take that version and implement/change it to be better optimized for Nvidia hardware before releasing it for PCs. Who says that the console version of a game wouldn't run better on an RDNA2 GPU than the final PC version? Especially when that PC version has seen considerable changes to work better under Nvidia hardware?

Console games use precompiled shaders, if there are specific optimizations done by hand targeting the console's RDNA2 hardware these are basically never carried over to PC, even for other RDNA2 GPUs because the shaders are always compiled at run time.

Vayra86That theory is quite simple. Lacking dedication and workforce. Its the story of Radeon's life. The lack of consistency results in a responsive strategy for AMD GPUs. This is not a technical issue. Its a management issue. AMD shows us time and time again it CAN make and release great stuff.

But its a bit like the 16 year old child. You know that they know how to do things proper. But it might just decide to stay in bed until 12AM today, because reasons. Or, it wakes up in a supposed new reality that requires radical change. Part of that is a healthy development; gotta fail to learn, right? But another part of it is just their struggle, because they are not leading in the market; but more importantly they also dont invest in a feature(set) heavily enough to become a leading force in whatever niche. Big daddy Nvidia decides where the market moves, AMD resists, but places nothing up against it, so then theyre forced to follow. So its not purely negative bitching on AMD from my end, but the results speak for itself. AMD needs to get much more consistent on the GPU front to make its products shine and sell.

AMD was many times it's worst enemy. But it's not always AMD's fault. It's also how tech press and users perceive AMD. For the tech press AMD was always the easy target, the company that they can bush all day long and not fear consequences. On the other hand tech press usually reacts with fear in front of Intel and more so when dealing with Nvidia. I mean, in the last HUB video about the plain GDDR6 RTX 4070, Steve says that selling a downgraded card at the same price with the same name is bad, but at the same time, ignoring their own poll where about 80% of voters where saying that they where very upset he tries indirectly with a constant smile in his face to convince his audience that 2-4% performance reduction is not that bad. Nothing to cry about. At the same time Intel's 13th and 14th fiasco is already forgotten. By almost everyone. When AMD does something or is rumored that they did something, it's universal outcry.
So, yeah, AMD is in many times it's worst enemy, but maybe they are also limited and with much less options how to react, respond, strategize in a hostile market compared to Intel and Nvidia. I mean, have you seen tech press or users of RTX 3000 cards revolting against Nvidia for not getting Frame Generation? AMD offers a Frame Generation to RTX 3000 users that works. Even a simple 7 euros, only a couple megabytes application offers Frame Generation to RTX 3000 users, but no. Nvidia said it can't be done, so it can't be done, case closed. Imagine the backlash against AMD if it was offering FSR 3.1 only to RX 7000 cards.

There's also an exception to that status quo: FreeSync. AMD pushed that successfully I think, and the result was basically the demise of Gsync AND a green cash cow. But... did AMD benefit much? Doubtful! Again, management/strategy... what is it? The tech wasnt the problem...

FreeSync had too many things favoring it, that's why it succeded. Firstly they had VESA behind them. FreeSync also succeded because it also got a second name, a non AMD name. VRR. So monitor/TV manufacturers could implement it together with whatever Nvidia tech, without upsetting Nvidia. It succeded because it was also implemented in HDMI and wasn't limited to PC monitors and DP. But what really helped is the fact that Nvidia's solution was a $100+ extra cost solution when you can buy a full monitor with that money. And the 4K version of that GSync module, I remember sites saying it was going to be even a higher than those $100+ cost that the original GSync module was. When the hardware alone costs as much as the monitor, it was smooth sailing for AMD's proposition against GSync. And tech press wasn't as much negative as it is the last couple of years with FSR. FreeSync didn't had to deal with that kind of hostility, maybe because with FreeSync it wasn't just the PC tech press involved, but also the monitor/TV tech press, who probably didn't cared about AMD or Nvidia but only about what that monitor/TV was really offering.
Today tech press is much more negative and aggressive against FSR, compared to how it treated FreeSync. And what is really interesting is that tech press today is much more hostile towards FSR 2.x and 3.x compared to what they where against FSR 1.x. When FSR 1.x was out tech press was showing it's limitations but it was also explaining to their audience that it was to be expected to get a lower quality upscaled image from it. It was good enough for a free option. They wheren't freezzing and magnifying frames to show a pixel in the thousands being in the wrong position to conclude that "FreeSync is crap" as they do the last 2 years in a what I believe is a marketing campaign against it, financed by, you know who I mean. Someone seems doesn't want a second FreeSync.

Vya DomusConsole games use precompiled shaders, if there are specific optimizations done by hand targeting the console's RDNA2 hardware these are basically never carried over to PC, even for other RDNA2 GPUs because the shaders are always compiled at run time.

Still RDNA2 hardware. The main reason, I believe, those optimizations aren't usually coming to PC, is because the PC version is targeting a different architecture. If those optimizations does reach the PC, because let's say the developer decides to base the PC port on the code generated for the console version then we have tech press and users starting a universal campaign compaining that AMD is subotaging Nvidia cards.


---------------------
PS
I'll say it again. Game developers are dealing with customers, those who will buy their games. They should care about their customers and their customers pay full price, either when using an Nvidia GPU, an Intel GPU or an AMD GPU. If a game manages to have 200 millions of sales, a 10% of those 200 millions, is 20 millions. I am pretty sure 20 millions is enough of a reason to optimize ALSO for AMD.
If developers want to optimize for only one architecture and incorporate only certain proprietary technologies that work only with that architecture they should implement in their games a GPU check routine and offer gamers the option of paying less for the game when not using an Nvidia GPU. They are already doing this in their games, putting certain parts of their games behind the pay wall of a DLC. Let them put whatever Nvidia proprietary tech they are incorporeting in the game in a DLC and sell the game with the free for all techs at a lower price. I know that everyone will find this suggestion stupid or even dangerous, but it could help to start moving the PC gaming market away from a proprietary monopolistic future.

john_I'll say it again. Game developers are dealing with customers, those who will buy their games. They should care about their customers and their customers pay full price, either when using an Nvidia GPU, an Intel GPU or an AMD GPU. If a game manages to have 200 millions of sales, a 10% of those 200 millions, is 20 millions. I am pretty sure 20 millions is enough of a reason to optimize ALSO for AMD.

You don't get it, developers basically have to optimize the game three times ideally, one time for consoles, one time for AMD and one time for Nvidia (I guess also for Intel), the reality is that they're just not gonna do that. Best case scenario they're gonna spend most the time profiling the code running on Nvidia GPUs and the bare minimum on AMD to ensure that it is running correctly and leave the optimizations for the driver team.

Vya DomusYou don't get it, developers basically have to optimize the game three times ideally, one time for consoles, one time for AMD and one time for Nvidia (I guess also for Intel), the reality is that they're just not gonna do that. Best case scenario they're gonna spend most the time profiling the code running on Nvidia GPUs and the bare minimum on AMD to ensure that it is running correctly and leave the optimizations for the driver team.

No, I do get it. How do you think AMD got that bad reputation about drivers? Game developers the last 15 years at least optimize for Intel and Nvidia hardware. Even the demo machines of the XBOX 11 years ago that where meant to show the AMD hardware they supposed to have, where Intel + Nvidia machines. AMD's driver team is mostly fighting an uphill battle, while Nvidia's driver team is having a smooth sailing experience that helps them focus on extra features.
Developers are getting everyone's money. I don't know how many times I have to repost the same thing. If they are lazy to optimize for Intel and AMD hardware, or it is too complicated for them, then they should start selling their games at lower prices to those having Intel or AMD GPU. Put Nvidia's proprietary features behind a pay wall and let everyone else pay for what they get.

By the way. When there was speculation that Starfield was getting DLSS later and not at Day 1 because it was easier for the developer to integrate ONE upscaling tech and integrate a second one later, many where saying that it wasn't the case. Developers had no excuse and it was obvious that AMD was paying them. Now optimizing three times, that's an excuse for them to not do it and it is an excuse not for one game but for every game released in the last 15 years. Beautiful.

Vya DomusYou don't get it, developers basically have to optimize the game three times ideally, one time for consoles, one time for AMD and one time for Nvidia (I guess also for Intel), the reality is that they're just not gonna do that. Best case scenario they're gonna spend most the time profiling the code running on Nvidia GPUs and the bare minimum on AMD to ensure that it is running correctly and leave the optimizations for the driver team.

Yep, and this is one of the reasons why AMD is moving to only focusing on the midrange to low end cards to gain market share. As AMD gains more market share, developers will focus on better and faster implementation of FRS. I think what also made AMD move to this, is Intel's Ark graphics cards and the support the developers have been giving them to get ExSS into their games.

Lost_TrollAs AMD gains more market share

It might be even harder at the lower end than it is on the higher. 7800 XT VS 4070 Super for example. Extra 50, maybe 80 bucks guarantee DLSS, state-of-the-art RT implementation, better efficiency etc. RX 7600 VS 4060 is an even deeper abyss. People are willing to save money but are not so keen on missing out. AMD outright lost their mind pricing their products as if they're a real competition and marketing as if NV were sleeping since 2018 and never released anything faster than 2080 Ti. With this approach, no matter the segment you focus on, you lose your share for sure.

This "but we have five megabytes more VRAM" and "but our GPUs are 0.0008 Zimbabwe dollars per FPS cheaper if you play obsolete games where DLSS and RT aren't a thing" just doesn't cut it. It's ultimately gone from bad to the point of no return.

john_Now optimizing three times, that's an excuse for them to not do it and it is an excuse not for one game but for every game released in the last 15 years. Beautiful.

The reality is many probably don't even optimize their game once, the way it works is developers send their code to AMD/Nvidia ahead of release and they either do something at the compiler/driver level so it emits more efficient code or they outright replace the shaders with faster equivalent versions. That's how you get those "game ready" drivers, now you reach a more conspiratorial level of the matter because this work is not done by the developer so it's not a mater of laziness but rather willingness to share early builds of the game with GPU vendors, do they share it with all of them and if not, why ?

Vayra86Bingo, and that's exactly why it ain't working out.

I'm saying this strategy does not work for AMD, and in the end, AMD is the company wasting time and energy on this, with a certain purpose. Its purpose is obviously to sell GPUs.
So that's all on AMD. As is their marketing overall. They suck hard at it.


What's so radically different to you, after 2.0 then? In my experience... the city's still lifeless and empty (okay, assets move around in it, but interaction zero), traffic is still prone to randomly crashing if you turn around, and let's not get started about police behaviour, that's probably even more hilarious... The missions are the same as before... the crafting and economy systems of the game are still broken AF, the new talent trees are a good addition though. That's really the only radical change I could say has truly made the game (somewhat) better. But even now, there's not really any semblance of balance, between talent trees or weapon types; or relative to the enemies you meet. I also can't truly say the combat's improved in the way it works or flows; you can still do mostly whatever and succeed...

Alongside that, numerous bugs still happen, and sure, a lot can be written off as 'oh its fun in the sandbox' but I wouldn't directly say it oozes quality and polish. And masterpiece... eh, just no. There's barely a game and there's a bunch of story missions in a city. That's about as far as Cyberpunk managed to go. It should have been so much more. And I tried, I really, really tried to find the game here, the thing that keeps you going back, but apart from the pretty pictures (in some places... Night City still also has a lot of deserted, unfinished alleys and whole districts even, and no, that's not for its immersive qualities) I don't find it, even after trying all sorts of builds and playstyles. A lot of features and skills for example, (cyberhacks especially, but lots of (smart-) guns too) just simply don't work well, either situationally or at all. Nothing changed here between 1.21 and 2.0.


Oh yeah, sure, an Nvidia game that also appears on every console where it uses AMD technology. Come on dude. What bags of money, they're bloody releasing the vast majority of sales on AMD hardware.

The fact Nvidia has pushed RT doesn't mean AMD can't push its upscale proper. Its IN THE GAME. As in, devs DID implement the technology. Of COURSE AMD is next in line to tell them they need to do it properly! And if they don't, AMD should have sent an engineer that way to do it for them - something Nvidia is keen to do, by the way, and has been doing, for decades. Its not just bags of money here, its dedicated investment of time and workforce. Its way too easy to keep saying 'devs fault' in this space. Collaboration doesn't work that way, as evident.

Lifeless and empty city? LMAO, did you play on low settings? Or some early pirated copy on an alpha build?

Cyberpunk 2.0 is considered one of the best comebacks of all time. Can't expect an AMD fanboy to agree tho.

Phantom Liberty also one of the best expansions ever made.

www.gamespot.com/reviews/cyberpunk-2077-phantom-liberty-review-the-songbird-sings/1900-6418116/

10/10 - Yet so dull :laugh:

Immortals of Aveum were better right? Because it was AMD sponsored :laugh:

Vayra86What's so radically different to you, after 2.0 then? In my experience... the city's still lifeless and empty (okay, assets move around in it, but interaction zero), traffic is still prone to randomly crashing if you turn around, and let's not get started about police behaviour, that's probably even more hilarious... The missions are the same as before... the crafting and economy systems of the game are still broken AF, the new talent trees are a good addition though. That's really the only radical change I could say has truly made the game (somewhat) better. But even now, there's not really any semblance of balance, between talent trees or weapon types; or relative to the enemies you meet. I also can't truly say the combat's improved in the way it works or flows; you can still do mostly whatever and succeed...

Lifeless? Empty? Zero interaction? These words perfectly describe any modern city, of which Night City is a perfect representation of. Try saying hello to a random stranger on the streets of Birmingham (UK), you'll see what I mean. Do NPCs feel like walking plastic dolls with no personality? That's the whole point of the game! It's a satire on modern society. You feel lonely in it because you're supposed to feel lonely.

And why would you want trouble with the cops? This is not GTA. You're supposed to do quests, and not run around wreaking havoc like a lunatic.

Vayra86Alongside that, numerous bugs still happen, and sure, a lot can be written off as 'oh its fun in the sandbox' but I wouldn't directly say it oozes quality and polish. And masterpiece... eh, just no. There's barely a game and there's a bunch of story missions in a city. That's about as far as Cyberpunk managed to go. It should have been so much more. And I tried, I really, really tried to find the game here, the thing that keeps you going back, but apart from the pretty pictures (in some places... Night City still also has a lot of deserted, unfinished alleys and whole districts even, and no, that's not for its immersive qualities) I don't find it, even after trying all sorts of builds and playstyles. A lot of features and skills for example, (cyberhacks especially, but lots of (smart-) guns too) just simply don't work well, either situationally or at all. Nothing changed here between 1.21 and 2.0.

I don't know what bugs you're talking about. I didn't find any that could break my immersion. I did watch bug compilation videos when the game out, and most of them were either nothing earth shattering, or ones that have no impact on normal gameplay whatsoever. Like the one where the player swam out of the map and used an infinite air cheat to see how broken your character's shadows are on the bottom of the ocean. Why would anyone ever do that, seriously? Or the one where the player could walk on water in a fountain, but you can't see well in the video that the water in that fountain is about an inch deep.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the game is perfect. What I'd want is a more intuitive hacking system, a more streamlined inventory, and crafting... just... why bother? Isn't that what cyber doctors are for?

lasLifeless and empty city? LMAO, did you play on low settings? Or some early pirated copy on an alpha build?

Cyberpunk 2.0 is considered one of the best comebacks of all time. Can't expect an AMD fanboy to agree tho.

Phantom Liberty also one of the best expansions ever made.

www.gamespot.com/reviews/cyberpunk-2077-phantom-liberty-review-the-songbird-sings/1900-6418116/

10/10 - Yet so dull :laugh:

Immortals of Aveum were better right? Because it was AMD sponsored :laugh:

I'll agree right away there's a stark difference the content in Phantom Liberty compared to the rest. But that's really also mostly the story (-related) missions much like the vanilla game before it. Those are done well and enjoyable. But yeah... 'best comebacks of all time'... I'm sure there's a circlejerk bubble where people feel that way. That's fine. I disagree. Isn't it great that we can disagree on something?

I'm not sure why you're adding the fanboy comment nor the Immortals of Aveum example though, but you do you. It does suit your general style of commenting here on TPU, childish.

AusWolfI don't know what bugs you're talking about. I didn't find any that could break my immersion

Traffic randomly crashing, police randomly shooting at passersby (there's often no rhyme or reason to it) are some examples given, its odd you didn't 'find' them honestly because they're not difficult to find.

T posing NPCs still happen, too. Clipping issues. There's really quite a list and its not dwindling.

AusWolfThis is not GTA. You're supposed to do quests, and not run around wreaking havoc like a lunatic

You're given a city sandbox and 95% of GTA's interactivity options (stealing cars, cop wanted system, etc.) and you're not supposed to use them? Interesting logic, that :) Especially as there is specific content in the game that pushes you to explore said city sandbox - its completely detached from any quests or story. Collectibles, thug encounters... etc.

I guess if you've set your expectations rather low wrt what Night City should 'be' then Cyberpunk could be considered a great game. But mine are higher from a big budget high exposure title like this.

I don't like people say CP2077 2.0 'the best comeback' They shouldn't release in its initial form in the first place. It just gonna be a trend toward devs to release game in such condition and patching them along the way. There are several things I wish to do like actually being able to board metro train manually and able to walk inside the train instead of just sitting. Phantom Liberty is good, but it's not 'the best expansion ever made'. This is coming from a guy who play CP2077 since early build and finished on all endings, Phantom Liberty included. Dare to say it's the only new games I play as of late (apart from Fallout London)

Back on the topic, frame gens can help low end cards but only if they achieve good framerate if it too low it can generate artifacts and motion problems. I use frame gen mods on my laptop RTX 3050 with DLAA enabled. I get good above 60fps and usually high 70s

john_I agree with what you say, I will just comment on this part.
If an AMD user and an Nvidia user buys the game, they will both pay the same amount of money. If the game developer can't or wouldn't optimize for a certain hardware, then they should be selling the game to those using that hardware at a lower price. Else they are becoming part of the problem that drives the market to a monopoly.


Would you please stop calling the others fanboys. It doesn't help how you look. You don't become more objective in others' eyes.

Then people with crappy TVs should pay less for movies as well? AMD is cheaper for a reason, worse optimization is part of why its cheaper. Worse features as well. If AMD were on par or even better than Nvidia, they would not have to undercut Nvidia. It is as simple as that. However even with lower prices, AMD is not selling well in the GPU segment.

ApocalypseeI don't like people say CP2077 2.0 'the best comeback' They shouldn't release in its initial form in the first place. It just gonna be a trend toward devs to release game in such condition and patching them along the way. There are several things I wish to do like actually being able to board metro train manually and able to walk inside the train instead of just sitting. Phantom Liberty is good, but it's not 'the best expansion ever made'. This is coming from a guy who play CP2077 since early build and finished on all endings, Phantom Liberty included. Dare to say it's the only new games I play as of late (apart from Fallout London)

Back on the topic, frame gens can help low end cards but only if they achieve good framerate if it too low it can generate artifacts and motion problems. I use frame gen mods on my laptop RTX 3050 with DLAA enabled. I get good above 60fps and usually high 70s

www.rockpapershotgun.com/cyberpunk-2077-phantom-liberty-review

Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty review: perhaps the best expansion pack ever made

Which expansion beats it then? :laugh:

Why is this thread turning to another AMD vs. NVIDIA? I own an AMD card. I played since version 1.6 on 6600 XT, then jumped to 6700, now own a 6800 XT. I enjoyed it pretty much at 1080p and FSR2, now I play it 1440p Ultra native, I don't have any RT but I can live without that. I don't need neither FSR nor FG. It's a 10/10 game and you can just play it without overreacting about everything.
Yes, the game should be updated earlier. Yes, if they decided to do it so late, they should use FSR 3.1. Yes, there must be someting broken with FSR3 implementation, since performance drop when using Native AA is massive and does not bring any visible image improvements. Still, just doing a third playthrough and it's so much fun :).

Vayra86Traffic randomly crashing, police randomly shooting at passersby (there's often no rhyme or reason to it) are some examples given, its odd you didn't 'find' them honestly because they're not difficult to find.

T posing NPCs still happen, too. Clipping issues. There's really quite a list and its not dwindling.

Of course I've seen random traffic crashes. So have I in real life (not so many of them, but still). I didn't see any T-posing or clipping, though, only in videos of version 1.0. The only bug that ever comes close to breaking my immersion that is still in the game in its current version is traffic randomly gridlocking without any reason whatsoever. Then I just jump on my bike and ride away, problem solved. :)

Keep in mind, my emphasis is on breaking immersion. Of course the game has bugs. But they aren't as bad as people say. Of course, everyone's tolerance level is different, so your mileage may vary. But seriously, comparing to early versions of Skyrim (which I also enjoyed back in the days), the game is immaculate. :D

Vayra86You're given a city sandbox and 95% of GTA's interactivity options (stealing cars, cop wanted system, etc.) and you're not supposed to use them? Interesting logic, that :) Especially as there is specific content in the game that pushes you to explore said city sandbox - its completely detached from any quests or story. Collectibles, thug encounters... etc.

I guess if you've set your expectations rather low wrt what Night City should 'be' then Cyberpunk could be considered a great game. But mine are higher from a big budget high exposure title like this.

Sure, you can piss off the cops in real life too, but it doesn't mean you should. Throughout my playthrough, I never got the impression that the game was built around you having to rampage like a maniac or steal cars. Of course you can if you want to, but I don't think that's the way this game is best experienced.

AusWolfOf course I've seen random traffic crashes. So have I in real life (not so many of them, but still). I didn't see any T-posing or clipping, though, only in videos of version 1.0. The only bug that ever comes close to breaking my immersion that is still in the game in its current version is traffic randomly gridlocking without any reason whatsoever. Then I just jump on my bike and ride away, problem solved. :)

Keep in mind, my emphasis is on breaking immersion. Of course the game has bugs. But they aren't as bad as people say. Of course, everyone's tolerance level is different, so your mileage may vary. But seriously, comparing to early versions of Skyrim (which I also enjoyed back in the days), the game is immaculate. :D


Sure, you can piss off the cops in real life too, but it doesn't mean you should. Throughout my playthrough, I never got the impression that the game was built around you having to rampage like a maniac or steal cars. Of course you can if you want to, but I don't think that's the way this game is best experienced.

Sounds like he played an old version of this game.

Nothing immersion breaking in my 100+ hour playthru - Seen several endings too

Cops can attack NPCs yep, and if you shoot them all, including cops, you will see that the NPCs the police were shooting at were carrying guns = Criminals.

Traffic crashes happens too, just like in real life. How is this a bug? Its fun.

Game is closing in at 30 million sales, most sales were made way after launch. Game was meh on launch. Today, it's in my top 10 of all time. Easily beating any other open world game. GTA is a joke compared to Cyberpunk, maybe GTA 6 can match it, however I doubt it, considering how simple GTA is, with no builds or anything.

GTA 6 with talent points and builds - just way more advanced gameplay? Yes please, but they will probably scare the casuals away...

lasSounds like he played an old version of this game.

Nothing immersion breaking in my 100+ hour playthru - Seen several endings too

Cops can attack NPCs yep, and if you shoot them all, including cops, you will see that the NPCs the police were shooting at were carrying guns = Criminals.

Traffic crashes happens too, just like in real life. How is this a bug? Its fun.

Game is closing in at 30 million sales, most sales were made way after launch. Game was meh on launch. Today, it's in my top 10 of all time. Easily beating any other open world game. GTA is a joke compared to Cyberpunk, maybe GTA 6 can match it, however I doubt it, considering how simple GTA is, with no builds or anything.

GTA 6 with talent points and builds - just way more advanced gameplay? Yes please, but they will probably scare the casuals away...

GTA games tend to be really poor story wise. I'd say the only good one was GTA IV. Also, CP2077 setting is much more interesting (to me at least) than GTA V and also more interesting than Deus Ex for example.

lasGame is closing in at 30 million sales, most sales were made way after launch. Game was meh on launch. Today, it's in my top 10 of all time. Easily beating any other open world game.

I wouldn't go that far, but it's certainly not a bad game. It's one of those that you have to let come to you instead of you trying to force something out of.

It's the small details that make it good, imo. The ridiculous posters and billboards (sex ads), the heavily populated, but still lifeless city, the ease of making acquaintances, but the difficulty of forming meaningful relationships, the massive, but still meaningless gap between rich and poor, etc. It's uncanny how much it has in common with modern city life. Kind of reminds me of the movie Idiocracy, just in a less humorous way.

lasGTA is a joke compared to Cyberpunk, maybe GTA 6 can match it, however I doubt it, considering how simple GTA is, with no builds or anything.

GTA 6 with talent points and builds - just way more advanced gameplay? Yes please, but they will probably scare the casuals away...

To be honest, I've never felt the appeal of GTA. "Thug life" isn't something I find aspirational to play in a game with, and blowing up random stolen cars and killing civilians for no reason aren't my cup of tea, either.